Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

[Crawl] Level Map

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
May 25, 2005 2:04:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

1. For those unfamiliar, Darshan's patch [kudos!] for Dungeon Crawl can
determine which parts of the map are accessible from the PC's current
location; even if there's only a trap in the way, it colors those
squares on the level map grey.

2. It seems illogical to me that a PC would know the relative position
of previously explored portions of a level if he didn't recognize any
connection between the previous explored area and his present location.

For example, how could he know (without careful measurement) that the
other up staircase on level 2 that he came down and went back up 5
minutes ago is 5 units north and 13 units west of the one he just came
down, when there's no recognizable connection on Level 2. (and the
horizontal coordinates of the staircases do not correlate closely from
level to level)

I suggest then, that a similar algorithm could be used to limit which
parts of the map are displayed at all (without the consideration of
inaccessibility due to traps). Hence if the PC teleports, or takes
stairs, (or other discontinous methods of travel,) only the small chunk
of map the player has most recently explored will be displayed, unless
his path connects with a previous chunk (at which point he recognizes
the dungeon) and then that chunk is displayed.

About the only useful effect of this though is to discourage the player
dipping down each staircase to prepare escape routes in case he gets in
over his head, discouraging going downstairs prematurely to obtain
random drops.

More about : crawl level map

Anonymous
May 25, 2005 3:17:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Martin Read wrote:
> Bzzt. Argument from realism where Linley's Dungeon Crawl is concerned.
> -500 points.

I believe it is a general principle that realism improves the
intuitiveness of play, but that might be a stretch here.
Anonymous
May 25, 2005 6:01:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com wrote:
> 1. For those unfamiliar, Darshan's patch [kudos!] for Dungeon Crawl can
> determine which parts of the map are accessible from the PC's current
> location; even if there's only a trap in the way, it colors those
> squares on the level map grey.
>
> 2. It seems illogical to me that a PC would know the relative position
> of previously explored portions of a level if he didn't recognize any
> connection between the previous explored area and his present location.
>
> For example, how could he know (without careful measurement) that the
> other up staircase on level 2 that he came down and went back up 5
> minutes ago is 5 units north and 13 units west of the one he just came
> down, when there's no recognizable connection on Level 2. (and the
> horizontal coordinates of the staircases do not correlate closely from
> level to level)
>
> I suggest then, that a similar algorithm could be used to limit which
> parts of the map are displayed at all (without the consideration of
> inaccessibility due to traps). Hence if the PC teleports, or takes
> stairs, (or other discontinous methods of travel,) only the small chunk
> of map the player has most recently explored will be displayed, unless
> his path connects with a previous chunk (at which point he recognizes
> the dungeon) and then that chunk is displayed.
>
> About the only useful effect of this though is to discourage the player
> dipping down each staircase to prepare escape routes in case he gets in
> over his head, discouraging going downstairs prematurely to obtain
> random drops.

The interaction between this and detection magic is going to be
horrible. When you detect traps or items, you get the locations of
many that are outside of your accessible dungeon area, some that are
even in other previously explored areas. But they really need to be
visible.

Also the effects of map deterioration, like from the forgetful
mutation, would be made worse than intended.

Maybe you can work around those two issues, but it's going to be more
complicated than just using the same algorithm.
Related resources
Anonymous
May 25, 2005 7:17:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Twisted One wrote:
> you
> started this thread and consciously put a [Crawl] tag in the subject,
> and then stripped the same tag from your own followup.

Must I apologize again for Google Groups? This time it appears to be
removing [...] from the reply's subject line by default. I've retyped
it for this post. I hope it works. I use GG because I use semipublic
computers for Internet Access.
Anonymous
May 25, 2005 8:02:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com wrote:
> Martin Read wrote:
>
>>Bzzt. Argument from realism where Linley's Dungeon Crawl is concerned.
>>-500 points.
>
> I believe it is a general principle that realism improves the
> intuitiveness of play, but that might be a stretch here.

That's not the really weird thing that's burning my brain. It's that you
started this thread and consciously put a [Crawl] tag in the subject,
and then stripped the same tag from your own followup. Make up your
durned mind! :) 

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 25, 2005 11:01:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

"jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com" <jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com> wrote:
>2. It seems illogical to me that a PC would know the relative position
>of previously explored portions of a level if he didn't recognize any
>connection between the previous explored area and his present location.

Bzzt. Argument from realism where Linley's Dungeon Crawl is concerned.
-500 points.
--
Martin Read - my opinions are my own. share them if you wish.
My roguelike games page (including my BSD-licenced roguelike) can be found at:
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~mpread/roguelikes.ht...
bounce. bounce. bounce. bounce bounce bounce bounce.
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 9:41:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Twisted One wrote:
>
>>you
>>started this thread and consciously put a [Crawl] tag in the subject,
>>and then stripped the same tag from your own followup.
>
> Must I apologize again for Google Groups? This time it appears to be
> removing [...] from the reply's subject line by default. I've retyped
> it for this post. I hope it works. I use GG because I use semipublic
> computers for Internet Access.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think angband.oook.cz hosts a gateway to
rgrd that allows posting...
--
At your service,
Kornel Kisielewicz (charonATmagma-net.pl) [http://chaos.magma-net.pl]
"The development cycle for roguelikes never ends..." -- Joseph
Hewitt
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 9:59:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

There would be the drawback of not being able to see on the map that
stash of loot at that other staircase, and not being able to see on the
map to remember that you detected a Centaur on level 3.

A complicated solution would involve storing separate snapshots of the
dungeon for separate pieces/levels, and making any of them viewable in
the level map display, but this might be another nice feature anyway:
PC could remember what was on other levels; where that stash was
anywhere in the dungeon, which level that ghost was on...

Igor D. WonderLlama wrote:
> jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com wrote:

> > I suggest then, that a similar algorithm could be used to limit which
> > parts of the map are displayed at all (without the consideration of
> > inaccessibility due to traps). Hence if the PC teleports, or takes
> > stairs, (or other discontinous methods of travel,) only the small chunk
> > of map the player has most recently explored will be displayed, unless
> > his path connects with a previous chunk (at which point he recognizes
> > the dungeon) and then that chunk is displayed.

> The interaction between this and detection magic is going to be
> horrible. When you detect traps or items, you get the locations of
> many that are outside of your accessible dungeon area, some that are
> even in other previously explored areas. But they really need to be
> visible.
>
> Also the effects of map deterioration, like from the forgetful
> mutation, would be made worse than intended.
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 12:47:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

A test: do you see brackets in the subject now?
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 1:06:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Twisted One wrote:

> you started this thread and consciously put a [Crawl] tag in the subject,
> and then stripped the same tag from your own followup.

At Authur J. O'Dwyer's suggestion, I sent this to Google Groups:

>Google groups generally tends to ignore or drop information in the subject >line surrounded by square brackets []
>for example, <1117040695.206334.284130@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>

>has a subject of "[Crawl] Level Map"
>however, Google Groups only displays the subject "Level Map" in the group >view.
>The thread view still shows the correct subject, as does "show options" >and "view original"

>However, when I reply to a message with square brackets in the >subject "[]" it removes them, plus anything in-between, for example :

>Message-ID: <1117045033.472173.72800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
>has a subject of
>"Re: Level Map"
>in response to
> <CYq*D9sPq@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>
>which has a subject of
>"Re: [Crawl] Level Map"

>The convention in several rec.games.roguelike.* newsgroups is to use the >name of the program to be discussed in brackets in the subject.

>This problem can be avoided by remembering to always use the "Show Options-> reply" route, and remembering to manually change the subject back to its >original form, but this could be much more convenient.


I 've recieved "a note to let you know we've received your email"
however I don't expect the engineers to get out of their chairs too
soon.
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 2:03:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Erik Piper wrote:
> jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com wrote:
> > A test: do you see brackets in the subject now?
>
> Well I'll be. I bet you tried the same trick I recently did. I forget to
> test it then and just now I went back and did so -- turns out it was no
> help at all. You stuffed 'em in manually didn't you? I remember reading
> somewhere the Google problem is only during "input" of the topic to the
> posting mechanism, not during "output." Well, that one just bit the dust...

I'm not sure what trick you're using, but I use google beta for all my
posting, and I can manually restore the tags. And at least to me, it
looks like the tags are getting posted intact.

What I do is previes every message, then edit the message to get a
dedicated posting screen, then edit the subject in the Subject: box.
So if Google is the problem you're trying to solve, this should do it.
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 9:55:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com wrote:
> A test: do you see brackets in the subject now?

Nope ;-)
--
At your service,
Kornel Kisielewicz (charonATmagma-net.pl) [http://chaos.magma-net.pl]
My opinions are my own. Share them at your own risk.
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 9:59:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com wrote:
> A test: do you see brackets in the subject now?

No.

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 10:05:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com wrote:
> A test: do you see brackets in the subject now?

Well I'll be. I bet you tried the same trick I recently did. I forget to
test it then and just now I went back and did so -- turns out it was no
help at all. You stuffed 'em in manually didn't you? I remember reading
somewhere the Google problem is only during "input" of the topic to the
posting mechanism, not during "output." Well, that one just bit the dust...

Erik
Anonymous
May 27, 2005 5:46:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Twisted One wrote:
>
>>you
>>started this thread and consciously put a [Crawl] tag in the subject,
>>and then stripped the same tag from your own followup.
>
> Must I apologize again for Google Groups?

That, or stop using it, if indeed you are.

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 28, 2005 6:18:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

In article <1117040695.206334.284130@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com says...

> I suggest then, that a similar algorithm could be used to limit which
> parts of the map are displayed at all (without the consideration of
> inaccessibility due to traps). Hence if the PC teleports, or takes
> stairs, (or other discontinous methods of travel,) only the small chunk
> of map the player has most recently explored will be displayed, unless
> his path connects with a previous chunk (at which point he recognizes
> the dungeon) and then that chunk is displayed.

If making paper maps is part of the game design, this is a good idea.

Otherwise, it is not.

- Gerry Quinn
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 1:07:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com wrote:

> At Authur J. O'Dwyer's suggestion, I sent this to Google Groups:
>
> >Google groups generally tends to ignore or drop information in the subject >line surrounded by square brackets []

> I 've recieved "a note to let you know we've received your email"
> however I don't expect the engineers to get out of their chairs too
> soon.

I recieved a reply Tuesday:

>Thank you for your note. We are aware of this problem, and our
>engineers are looking into it. We hope to have this fixed soon. We appreciate
>your patience, and thank you for taking the time to write.
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 4:20:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com wrote:
>>Thank you for your note. We are aware of this problem, and our
>>engineers are looking into it. We hope to have this fixed soon. We appreciate
>>your patience, and thank you for taking the time to write.

If my (not inconsiderable) experience with (business to consumer rather
than business to business) technical support in the IT field is anything
to go by, it might actually be back to normal by Christmas, although
surely not before Labor Day. ;P

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 9:26:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.misc,rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

TS where?

Twisted One wrote:
> jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>Thank you for your note. We are aware of this problem, and our
> >>engineers are looking into it. We hope to have this fixed soon. We appreciate
> >>your patience, and thank you for taking the time to write.
>
> If my (not inconsiderable) experience with (business to consumer rather
> than business to business) technical support in the IT field is anything
> to go by, it might actually be back to normal by Christmas, although
> surely not before Labor Day. ;P
>
> --
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
> Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
> "One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
> One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
!